Post by: 67thRaptorBull on June 18, 2004, 09:45:00 AM
second, nemt, dont reply here, we all know your going to call micheal moore a higa ass liberal, and all that crap, and that the movie probably has no basis and no valid points and all that crap, so save it my little minded friend
ok, on to the topic
so what our your peoples opinion on the movie (if youve already seen it) and if you havnt seen it, are you going to?
(it comes out June 25th)
personally, i like his work (bowling for columbine was very well done) and i dont see why this subject he picked is any more controversial, just because its going on now doesnt mean we cant see radical sides of it.
i also am a little pissed that it never came out in the US earlier, it just shows some people didnt have the balls to show it, and some people had somethign to hide for not allowing it to be showed.
either way, whats your peoples thoughts on it
(sp, i dont care, nemt correct it for me)
This post has been edited by 67thRaptorBull on Jun 19 2004, 04:02 AM
Post by: Spency234 on June 18, 2004, 09:49:00 AM
I loved Bowling for Columbine as well, I can't beleive George Bush hasn't "disposed" of him yet.
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on June 18, 2004, 10:06:00 AM
| QUOTE (Spency234 @ Jun 18 2004, 11:46 AM) |
| Very interested in what he has to say, and no I have not seen it yet. I loved Bowling for Columbine as well, I can't beleive George Bush hasn't "disposed" of him yet. |
yea, i know
the best was how he kept bugging Charlton Heston on the little girl that was killed by a gun and almost made him cry
or when he had the paralyzed kid from columbine try to buy bullets at k-mart
Post by: Ween311 on June 18, 2004, 11:18:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| micheal moore a higa ass liberal, and all that crap |
Yep, you are right about that!
Post by: HeLiuM on June 18, 2004, 11:46:00 AM
| QUOTE (Ween311 @ Jun 18 2004, 07:15 PM) |
| Yep, you are right about that! |
his points aren't invalid simply because hes a liberal (and don't reply with "yeah, his points are invalid because hes a fat biased hippy". Give it some substance). In the past he has supported his arguments with actual statistics and facts (some people here could could work on that). Don't dismiss it until you've seen it.
He's really fighting the R rating. At 16, you're supposed to be blind to violence, at 17 you can fight a war (and finally see rated R movies).
Post by: muerte on June 18, 2004, 11:53:00 AM
| QUOTE (67thRaptorBull @ Jun 18 2004, 11:42 AM) |
| well, first off, for anyone now in the US, i hate you, as youve already had the chance to see it |
Good job... I really care that you hate me!
http://www.bowlingfortruth.com/
Post by: mirx999 on June 18, 2004, 01:30:00 PM
Post by: muerte on June 18, 2004, 01:31:00 PM
| QUOTE (mirx999 @ Jun 18 2004, 03:27 PM) |
| While the guy pisses me off like crazy (he's a green, by the way), He's a master of research. |
He's the master of bending public opinion. That's something to be proud of, but its also a tool for his misleading works.
Post by: Colonel32 on June 18, 2004, 02:12:00 PM
| QUOTE (muerte @ Jun 18 2004, 09:28 PM) |
| He's the master of bending public opinion. That's something to be proud of, but its also a tool for his misleading works. |
I agree, I'm not a Moore fan at all but apparently this movie is very different then the rest of his trash. Fox news even gave it a great review last week and by a guy who slammed Bowling for Columbine really hard. When someone at fox news is saying nice things about Micheal Moore it makes me think this movie is going to be really powerful.
While I liken Moore to Rush as an entertainer and not someone who you should get your "news" from. I am beyond thrilled that someone is finally talking up about Saudi Arabia and their connections to terrorism.
P.S. that sight you linked to is just as spun as a Moore documentary.... ironic isn't it ;)
This post has been edited by Colonel32 on Jun 18 2004, 09:14 PM
Post by: nagmine on June 18, 2004, 04:34:00 PM
might as well use it while we still can
Post by: Ween311 on June 19, 2004, 03:22:00 AM
| QUOTE (HeLiuM @ Jun 18 2004, 07:43 PM) |
| his points aren't invalid simply because hes a liberal (and don't reply with "yeah, his points are invalid because hes a fat biased hippy". Give it some substance). In the past he has supported his arguments with actual statistics and facts (some people here could could work on that). Don't dismiss it until you've seen it. He's really fighting the R rating. At 16, you're supposed to be blind to violence, at 17 you can fight a war (and finally see rated R movies). |
I never said his points aren't valid. I haven't seen the movie yet so I can't really comment on it, but just be careful of what Michael Moore presents as facts. There is much proof out there that he manipulates people to get his own version of the "truth."
For example...the whole Disney not distributing his movie deal. Disney told him that when they fronted the money for the filming. did Michael Moore make a big deal of it then? No, he waited until right before Cannes to get more publicity about his movie.
Again, I can not comment on the movie because I have not seen it, and I am sure that many people disagree with me about Michael Moore himself, just be careful of what he presents as truth. Remember that no matter how political he tries to make it, it is still a just a movie.
Post by: Spency234 on June 19, 2004, 05:05:00 AM
| QUOTE (Colonel32 @ Jun 18 2004, 05:09 PM) |
| P.S. that sight you linked to is just as spun as a Moore documentary.... ironic isn't it ;) |
My thoughts exactly. I know the truth is out there, but I don't ever expect to actually find out what it is.
Post by: Heet on June 19, 2004, 07:59:00 AM
Post by: xFusioNx on June 19, 2004, 10:01:00 AM
Some of what he says, sure it could be considered spin, but the same goes for any type news broadcast of documentary. The spin comes into play because the director is focusing on what he sees as the most important points and cuts out the rest. If that's a problem then his movies would be like 10 hours long to see every bit of footage he takes. The point of editing is to cut out the unecessary footage yet still keep the message of the scene intact.
This latest Moore documentary will be great. I love his presentation and the fact that he has some big ass balls when it comes to confronting people.
Alot of the points he is bringing forth are already known but no one, thanks to our choked media, has had the nuts to present them in a public medium.
Amen to him for pushing these things to light.
Post by: cainedna on June 19, 2004, 12:06:00 PM
| QUOTE (Heet @ Jun 19 2004, 03:56 PM) |
| He is just a fat lying liberal and thats all. I vote we send him and the rest of Hollywood to all of the third world countries. They think they hate us now........... |
Totally!
...
Oh, wait. Were you being serious?
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on June 19, 2004, 12:29:00 PM
| QUOTE (Heet @ Jun 19 2004, 09:56 AM) |
| He is just a fat lying liberal and thats all. I vote we send him and the rest of Hollywood to all of the third world countries. They think they hate us now........... |
good one, any proof of it, or are you turning into nemt now?
Post by: green_beetle on June 19, 2004, 05:16:00 PM
my class at school atm is studying bowling for columbine.
all i can say is that his films go through alot of editing to make it seem alot worse than it is.
eg. marilyn manson scene where everyone blames manson for the shootings. he edited what every politician and newsreader said by cuting out everything except the words marilyn manson, then played 50 different people saying "marilyn manson" making it seem like everyone was against the singer.
but never showed the whole speech what the people were actually talking about.
im not saying the things in the movie arnt true, just telling that things in the film are edited to sound worse than they actually are.
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on June 19, 2004, 06:27:00 PM
| QUOTE (green_beetle @ Jun 19 2004, 08:16 PM) |
| i like his films alot. my class at school atm is studying bowling for columbine. all i can say is that his films go through alot of editing to make it seem alot worse than it is. eg. marilyn manson scene where everyone blames manson for the shootings. he edited what every politician and newsreader said by cuting out everything except the words marilyn manson, then played 50 different people saying "marilyn manson" making it seem like everyone was against the singer. but never showed the whole speech what the people were actually talking about. im not saying the things in the movie arnt true, just telling that things in the film are edited to sound worse than they actually are. |
yes, but from a standpoint, he does that (IMO) to get the point across
i know its very biased, but on an issue like columbine (with guns and all that shit) making it sound worse, is better, in that it has a bigger impact
and he'll probably do the same with 9/11, which alot of people will hate him for, but people have to wake up and see some of the shit this country has done under bush is ridiculoud (for nemt, words like enron, holoburton (sp?) and this fucking fuel period*** come to mind)
***just for the record, if anyone wonders why prices went down, its because a few EPA bans on refineries were lifted, allowinf for more prodruction, so in exchange for fuel, we get polluted (haha, like it already isnt) air
Post by: Ween311 on June 20, 2004, 02:22:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| i know its very biased, but on an issue like columbine (with guns and all that shit) making it sound worse, is better, in that it has a bigger impact |
So what your saying is that truth should be sacrificed just to make a bigger impact?
I believe in freedom of speech, so I am not going to say that Michael Moore should not be able to edit his mockumentaries the way he wants, but remember he is making a lot money for this film. At the same time, I think that all media including journalists, newsanchors, and talk show hosts on the left and the right do the same thing. News is not fair and objective anymore. It is all about ratings because that is what drives how much the news outlets can charge for advertising. Call me cynical but I don't think that you can take anything that you read or hear or watch on the news as the total truth.
I also don't think Michael Moore is brave or has "balls" for making this movie. I think it is driven by greed.
Post by: Heet on June 20, 2004, 06:30:00 AM
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on June 20, 2004, 06:43:00 AM
| QUOTE (Ween311 @ Jun 20 2004, 05:22 AM) |
| So what your saying is that truth should be sacrificed just to make a bigger impact? I believe in freedom of speech, so I am not going to say that Michael Moore should not be able to edit his mockumentaries the way he wants, but remember he is making a lot money for this film. At the same time, I think that all media including journalists, newsanchors, and talk show hosts on the left and the right do the same thing. News is not fair and objective anymore. It is all about ratings because that is what drives how much the news outlets can charge for advertising. Call me cynical but I don't think that you can take anything that you read or hear or watch on the news as the total truth. I also don't think Michael Moore is brave or has "balls" for making this movie. I think it is driven by greed. |
wow, you never fail to impress me, in that human intelligence can go so low
first off, you must be one of the NRA gun yuppies, in that guns must get you off, because what he did with bowling for columbine was a GOOD thing. it helped show (in a very biased way) the retardeness of all this gun shit, and how easy it is to get one
and if you think hes driven by greed, your either retarded or jealous. this man truly does have the balls to make a movie that shows the fuckups of the Bush administration, and insist on showing it.
so now i think your also a bush whore, who thinks bush never ever does anything wrong and you will defend his honor for no apperent reason.
either way, i wonder why you still talk........
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on June 20, 2004, 06:44:00 AM
| QUOTE (Heet @ Jun 20 2004, 09:30 AM) |
| The difference between Rush and Mike Moore is that Rush tells the truth. And no, im not turning into Nemt but I agree with just about everything he has said. Liberals are dreamers and Conservatives are realists. If you want to believe in fantasy then by all means, vote for and support liberals. |
no, im pretty sure you did turn into nemt
and whatever, if all you people without brain cells (as nemt would put it) wanna just throw around the term "liberal" like it really means anything, go ahead and do it
calling someone a liberal doesnt change the facts, or it doesnt make there argument any less
and just so you know, im niether a liberal or conservative
Post by: Heet on June 20, 2004, 06:59:00 AM
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on June 20, 2004, 07:18:00 AM
| QUOTE (Heet @ Jun 20 2004, 09:59 AM) |
| Your a liberal. Your opinions and views of the things discussed have revealed your ideologies. Your not comfortable with that? Its ok, most arent. |
haha, thanks for putting words in my mouths
and im not old enough to even vote, but if you feel as labeling me as a liberal because it gives you security, even though your wrong and have no idea what the hell your actually talking about, but instead list people as liberals as your defense, then go ahead, i dont really care
all i know is i may seem biased, but on issues im fair, it just depends on what issues they are and how i feel about them
sometimes ill argue on the conservative side if i really feel its the right side and sometimes ill argue on the liberal sides, or sometimes i wont argu because people like you fuck it up
seriously, if thats all you, and nemt can ever do is call people liberals and make it seem like its a downfall to themselves, then just stop posting
anyways, back on topic (hopefully) or are we gonna keep namecalling heet?
anyone else have opinions on this film, or anyone seen it yet (UK)??
Post by: Heet on June 20, 2004, 07:31:00 AM
Post by: Ween311 on June 20, 2004, 09:16:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| wow, you never fail to impress me, in that human intelligence can go so low first off, you must be one of the NRA gun yuppies, in that guns must get you off, because what he did with bowling for columbine was a GOOD thing. it helped show (in a very biased way) the retardeness of all this gun shit, and how easy it is to get one and if you think hes driven by greed, your either retarded or jealous. this man truly does have the balls to make a movie that shows the fuckups of the Bush administration, and insist on showing it. so now i think your also a bush whore, who thinks bush never ever does anything wrong and you will defend his honor for no apperent reason. either way, i wonder why you still talk........ |
No, I am not an NRA gun yuppie. I don't own a gun, but I support the freedom that people are allowed to own guns. I believe in the freedom of speech also, so you can say what you want to say. That's fine with me. You have that freedom. I never put down his movies. I just said to look at what he is doing as a form of entertainment. It's a movie.
You don't think he made this money for money? You think he made it just because he wants to stand up for what is right? If you truly believe that then I feel sorry for you. I don't think Dan Rather or Rush Limbaugh do it for the good of the people either. I think they also do what they do for money too. Not just Michael Moore. Don't cry.
Post by: Raver758 on June 20, 2004, 09:20:00 AM
Post by: Heet on June 20, 2004, 09:20:00 AM
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on June 20, 2004, 10:53:00 AM
| QUOTE (Heet @ Jun 20 2004, 12:20 PM) |
| Right, Moore believes that guns kill people. Now THAT is an intelligent person. |
yay for sarcasm
like i said, i really dont t ry to label myself as anything, as i try to be unbiased as possible, but on some issues i get carried away, espacially when people like ween try to act or post intelligently, but fail at it
i do think moore does it for the documentaries, or why else would he pick such picky subjects?
if he wanted just money, he sure as hell wouldnt pick two of this countries most picky subjects, knowing full well he might even lose money on them
its called logic, use it ween
and raver, ur just an idiot from what i can gather
Post by: Ween311 on June 21, 2004, 02:28:00 AM
| QUOTE (67thRaptorBull @ Jun 20 2004, 07:53 PM) |
| yay for sarcasm like i said, i really dont t ry to label myself as anything, as i try to be unbiased as possible, but on some issues i get carried away, espacially when people like ween try to act or post intelligently, but fail at it i do think moore does it for the documentaries, or why else would he pick such picky subjects? if he wanted just money, he sure as hell wouldnt pick two of this countries most picky subjects, knowing full well he might even lose money on them its called logic, use it ween and raver, ur just an idiot from what i can gather |
Logic? How about this for logic. If he is not doing it for money why is it being released in movie theaters? If it was for the pure unadulterated knowledge that you think he is bringing to the masses, why is it not shown for free on PBS or BBC or any other public broadcast stations?
Listen, I am not trying to put you down for liking Michael Moore or his movies. I said that I believe he has the right to make whatever movies he wants, but if you think that he is making these movies to enlighten people then you need to open your eyes. Don't take that the wrong way please. I am not trying to imply anything, but do you have any idea how much money Moore will make from this movie? Part of his purpose is to bring these subjects to light but he will get very rich off this movie. Great for him. He deserves it for all his hard work but don't think that he is not doing it for the money. Why do you think he chose to make a big deal out of Disney not distributing his movie when he did? For publicity maybe? He knew he was going to have to find a different distibutor when he started making his movie.
Maybe I am being too cynical. I just think that almost everybody has something to sell and you need to not blindly believe everything that you read or see. Especially movies.
Also, I am not making this personal, so please try to refrain from personal insults. It does not help your case any.
| QUOTE |
| so now i think your also a bush whore, who thinks bush never ever does anything wrong and you will defend his honor for no apperent reason. |
Oh yeah...how you arrive at that conclusion? I haven't said anything about Bush in this thread at all........talk about logic.....
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on June 21, 2004, 09:15:00 AM
| QUOTE (Ween311 @ Jun 21 2004, 05:28 AM) |
| Logic? How about this for logic. If he is not doing it for money why is it being released in movie theaters? If it was for the pure unadulterated knowledge that you think he is bringing to the masses, why is it not shown for free on PBS or BBC or any other public broadcast stations? Listen, I am not trying to put you down for liking Michael Moore or his movies. I said that I believe he has the right to make whatever movies he wants, but if you think that he is making these movies to enlighten people then you need to open your eyes. Don't take that the wrong way please. I am not trying to imply anything, but do you have any idea how much money Moore will make from this movie? Part of his purpose is to bring these subjects to light but he will get very rich off this movie. Great for him. He deserves it for all his hard work but don't think that he is not doing it for the money. Why do you think he chose to make a big deal out of Disney not distributing his movie when he did? For publicity maybe? He knew he was going to have to find a different distibutor when he started making his movie. Maybe I am being too cynical. I just think that almost everybody has something to sell and you need to not blindly believe everything that you read or see. Especially movies. Also, I am not making this personal, so please try to refrain from personal insults. It does not help your case any. Oh yeah...how you arrive at that conclusion? I haven't said anything about Bush in this thread at all........talk about logic..... |
well, thanks for enlightening me as that he will make money of this movie
thats a no brainer, everyone makes money, politicians (i cant believe they pay bush, he cant even talk), police officers, etc
but moore makes money, yes, but he also brings certain issues to light, issues that no one else (and i can say this, as know one else has come close to what he has done with these issues) has the balls to
if he was really in it for the money, he wouldnt be so biased, or make the movie out to piss of bush supporters or all that crap
like i said, yes he will make money, but he also does it to enlighten (if he showed it on PBS, how many people would see it, 2?)
im just telling you, its a little common sense
what hes doing with this movie would be like making a WWII film, and supporting germanies efforts and ideas in the War (ie, moore is going way against the white house in this movie, but now it seems the people want that, as bushes rating is at what.. less then 50%?)
Post by: Ween311 on June 21, 2004, 09:20:00 AM
Post by: Ween311 on June 21, 2004, 09:25:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| "We're selling it as a broad-based entertainment," Ortenberg said. "It's a good story well told by a master storyteller; he explains complex issues in layman's terms." |
Broad-based entertainment.....
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on June 21, 2004, 09:41:00 AM
| QUOTE (Ween311 @ Jun 21 2004, 12:25 PM) |
| Just another 2 cents for thought. Here is a quote from Tom Ortenberg who is the head of Lionsgate Films (one of the two companies that bought the movie from Mirimax.) Broad-based entertainment..... |
ok, but whats your point?
entertainment is a word, it proves what then?
Post by: Ween311 on June 21, 2004, 10:51:00 AM
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on June 21, 2004, 11:40:00 AM
| QUOTE (Ween311 @ Jun 21 2004, 01:51 PM) |
| I am not trying to prove anything. It is my opinion that Michael Moore does not always portray the whole truth in his movies. He puts a spin on it. I never said that is bad. Basically everybody puts a spin on what they are selling. That's how they get it to appeal to people. I am just trying to point out AGAIN, that it is just a movie and not to blindly accept everything in it as purely factual. I have not seen the movie yet so I am only basing this opinion on what I saw from Bowling for Columbine. |
yea, but the way he makes his movie isnt necessarily for fact, but for results
i like how he is biased, and portrays things worse then they are, at least in the eyes of alot of americans, it can help lead to some sort of change
frankly, the two issues hes big on (guns and bush) i want him to make them out worse then they are, as guns i dont care about, and bush, i want him out of office, hes retarded
Post by: melon on June 21, 2004, 12:30:00 PM
So what if he can be a bit cruel on the average shop worker?
He is getting a point of view accross which would not be heard otherwise.
The right wing has intense propaganda spewing out every day, how else can you explain some of the people on this forum?
He is one left wing voice faced by dozens of right wing voices.
If you belive him or not it is good he tries to get a different perspective across and if he opens a few peoples eyes along the way, even better.
Since moore has said he wants wants people to see his movies and doesnt care if they download it. Has anyone got a copy?
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on June 21, 2004, 01:01:00 PM
Post by: xFusioNx on June 21, 2004, 02:59:00 PM
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on June 21, 2004, 03:03:00 PM
| QUOTE (xFusioNx @ Jun 21 2004, 05:59 PM) |
| It's a fucking documentary, not a movie. |
just wondering who that was directed to?
Post by: xFusioNx on June 21, 2004, 06:56:00 PM
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on June 22, 2004, 04:55:00 AM
Post by: SniperKilla on June 25, 2004, 10:32:00 PM
| QUOTE (xFusioNx @ Jun 22 2004, 02:56 AM) |
| Not you raptor, just the other ignorant pukes who keep calling it a movie. It's a documentary. Get it right. I noticed no one commented on my earlier post in this thread either, maybe people should read the whole thread before posting. |
movie/mockumentery/docudrama can all describe this film.. but defiently not documentry..
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on June 25, 2004, 10:38:00 PM
| QUOTE (SniperKilla @ Jun 26 2004, 01:32 AM) |
| movie/mockumentery/docudrama can all describe this film.. but defiently not documentry.. |
umm, ok?
Post by: SniperKilla on June 25, 2004, 11:16:00 PM
Noun 1. documentary - a film or TV program presenting the facts about a person or event
micheal moore presents lies and staged scenes..
Post by: Odb718 on June 26, 2004, 01:24:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| Doc`u`men´ta`ry Noun 1. documentary - a film or TV program presenting the facts about a person or event micheal moore presents lies and staged scenes.. |
You are sooooooooo stupid! Have you seen the movie? Have you ever seen what he's actually done? You got to be extreamly ignorant to think Michale moore could stage George Bush shakeing hands with Al kieda!!
Sniper, wtf are we fighting the war over? besides oil and natural gas?
Remember Operation Iraqie Liberation? I wonder why they changed the name from O.I.L to O.I.F???????????????????
----
Post by: gcskate27 on June 26, 2004, 08:06:00 AM
| QUOTE (67thRaptorBull @ Jun 18 2004, 12:42 PM) |
| i also am a little pissed that it never came out in the US earlier, it just shows some people didnt have the balls to show it, and some people had somethign to hide for not allowing it to be showed. |
well this makes no sense... surely youd want the movie to come out around now or a bit later... closer to election time... if you wanted bush out so badly...
ive seen bowling for columbine and fahrenheit 9/11... and they were both distorted to some degree...
i dont agree that people need/should have guns: as i mostly dont see the point... i also dont think bush is a very effective president... but i can see that moores stuff is swayed, just as peoples critisim of moores stuff is swayed... "hes a lying, liberal nutjob who hates america"
its not as though he completely fabricates instances, scenes and past relations between people... they do have basis in fact... i find it odd how people only pic on moores stuff as though it and it alone should be completely truthfull and show all sides... some people have touched on rush and other people stuff being equally skewed, and good for them for seeing that... too many people only notice the faults in what they are personally against...
moore doesnt agree with the bush administration and wants them out of power, so he chooses to show the most negative side possible in order to illustate his point to people... i see nothing wrong with that... its his opinion stated through choosen facts... just like everyone else does...
the most annoying thing about the movie is the overheard conversations while leaving the theatre... stupid hot topic and drama club kids talking about how their parents are pissed at them for watching the movie... congrats for rebeling against your parents but not actually standing for anything/understanding what your "side" stands for... stupid fucks...
the "documentary" coming out against michael moore is much worse in my opinion... its made from some stupid opprotunistic college film student who wants to make a name for himself by playing on peoples patriotism and nationalism... at least michael moore confronts what he sees as problems, this guy is just making a movie saying "america is great because its america, no problems here... michael moore is just a stupid fat liberal"...
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on June 26, 2004, 08:19:00 AM
| QUOTE (gcskate27 @ Jun 26 2004, 11:06 AM) |
| well this makes no sense... surely youd want the movie to come out around now or a bit later... closer to election time... if you wanted bush out so badly... ive seen bowling for columbine and fahrenheit 9/11... and they were both distorted to some degree... i dont agree that people need/should have guns: as i mostly dont see the point... i also dont think bush is a very effective president... but i can see that moores stuff is swayed, just as peoples critisim of moores stuff is swayed... "hes a lying, liberal nutjob who hates america" its not as though he completely fabricates instances, scenes and past relations between people... they do have basis in fact... i find it odd how people only pic on moores stuff as though it and it alone should be completely truthfull and show all sides... some people have touched on rush and other people stuff being equally skewed, and good for them for seeing that... too many people only notice the faults in what they are personally against... moore doesnt agree with the bush administration and wants them out of power, so he chooses to show the most negative side possible in order to illustate his point to people... i see nothing wrong with that... its his opinion stated through choosen facts... just like everyone else does... the most annoying thing about the movie is the overheard conversations while leaving the theatre... stupid hot topic and drama club kids talking about how their parents are pissed at them for watching the movie... congrats for rebeling against your parents but not actually standing for anything/understanding what your "side" stands for... stupid fucks... the "documentary" coming out against michael moore is much worse in my opinion... its made from some stupid opprotunistic college film student who wants to make a name for himself by playing on peoples patriotism and nationalism... at least michael moore confronts what he sees as problems, this guy is just making a movie saying "america is great because its america, no problems here... michael moore is just a stupid fat liberal"... |
good post
Post by: The unProfessional on June 26, 2004, 09:15:00 AM
| QUOTE |
Not you raptor, just the other ignorant pukes who keep calling it a movie. It's a documentary. Get it right. I noticed no one commented on my earlier post in this thread either, maybe people should read the whole thread before posting. |
... Maybe you should read the dictionary before making false claims.
I'm impressed though. There are still people willing to argue that moore's films are documentaries, rather than movies. And they adamant about it!
Documentaries aren't editorialized! Moore's movies are pure editorialism!
Moore can do whatever he wants... but don't glorify his work as the new gospel...
If rush limbaugh made a movie and called it a documentary... simply because it had no plot... would you still be saying the same thing?
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on June 26, 2004, 09:36:00 AM
| QUOTE (The unProfessional @ Jun 26 2004, 12:15 PM) |
| ... Maybe you should read the dictionary before making false claims. I'm impressed though. There are still people willing to argue that moore's films are documentaries, rather than movies. And they adamant about it! Documentaries aren't editorialized! Moore's movies are pure editorialism! Moore can do whatever he wants... but don't glorify his work as the new gospel... If rush limbaugh made a movie and called it a documentary... simply because it had no plot... would you still be saying the same thing? |
no, im just praising moore because i like t he way he slanders the president, thats my kind of journalism
Post by: The unProfessional on June 26, 2004, 09:57:00 AM
.. Btw.. my post with the quote is quoting fuzion... not you.
Post by: melon on June 26, 2004, 11:58:00 AM
If I was to watch a documentary about the vietnam war made by the BBC it would portray a diferent view to one you watched made by a Rupert Murdoch owned channel.
Bias is a fact of life. The imagery chosen for each scene will have been chosen for a paticular reason, to portray something. Even if the director thinks they are being impartial, subconsiously they will make decisions without realising.
I have seen documentaries about JFK which have been the biggest pile of propaganda since Tony Blair's 45 minute claim*. So Moore films do class as documentaries hence his oscar. If Hollywood class them as documentaries then we should.
*Saddam was supposed to be able to attack British citizens with weopens within this time, turned out to be battlefield munitions
Post by: The unProfessional on June 26, 2004, 12:05:00 PM
| QUOTE |
As objective as they try to be some subjective ideas will slip through. |
You don't really think Moore's ideas "slip through" do you? Moore knows that documentaries are considered to be very powerful and are taken seriously as a source of news and information. People find much more "knowledge" today in movies than they do in books. Moore knows this.
I don't know why I have to keep reiterating. Moore did nothing wrong. But referring to his work as a documentary is false. Just because hollywood does it doesn't mean it's correct. You're right that "documentaries" in the past have contained massive bias. By definition they're NOT documentaries. People often consider hollywood a source of information. A quick example: Watching U-571 doesn't make you an expert on a slice of WWII history... especially since the British were almost entirely responsible for capturing documents and hardware related to the enigma, not the Americans. Hollywood is more appropriately related to fiction... not fact. They entertain... they don't inform.
| QUOTE |
If Hollywood class them as documentaries then we should. |
Uh... why? don't sell yourself short... you have a brain... you can think on your own.
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on June 26, 2004, 12:15:00 PM
| QUOTE (The unProfessional @ Jun 26 2004, 12:57 PM) |
| Raptorbull... you're better than that. Screenwriters aren't journalists. They're entertainers. If moore praised the president, would you still call him a journalist? I doubt it. .. Btw.. my post with the quote is quoting fuzion... not you. |
no, i didnt mean journalism as in being serious, i just meant since moore is making of fun of the president and making him out as an idiot, thats my kind of journalism (but not necessarily real journalism)
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on June 26, 2004, 12:18:00 PM
| QUOTE (The unProfessional @ Jun 26 2004, 03:05 PM) |
| Since when is hollywood a good judge of objectivity? Although any production will contain some sort of bias, an editorial film is not a documentary. You said yourself... You don't really think Moore's ideas "slip through" do you? Moore knows that documentaries are considered to be very powerful and are taken seriously as a source of news and information. People find much more "knowledge" today in movies than they do in books. Moore knows this. I don't know why I have to keep reiterating. Moore did nothing wrong. But referring to his work as a documentary is false. Just because hollywood does it doesn't mean it's correct. You're right that "documentaries" in the past have contained massive bias. By definition they're NOT documentaries. People often consider hollywood a source of information. A quick example: Watching U-571 doesn't make you an expert on a slice of WWII history... especially since the British were almost entirely responsible for capturing documents and hardware related to the enigma, not the Americans. Hollywood is more appropriately related to fiction... not fact. They entertain... they don't inform. Uh... why? don't sell yourself short... you have a brain... you can think on your own. |
not trying to be mean or anything, but who gives a shit what the film is classified as.....it doesnt mean anything and it doesnt take away from the film no less
Post by: The unProfessional on June 26, 2004, 12:25:00 PM
So if a propagandist, right or left, releases heavily opinionated material, marks it as Information, and people take it as gospel, there is a problem.
The films classification doesn't matter do you, raptor, because you're thinking for yourself. You understand what Fahrenheit is about, and you're aware of it's purpose. Anyone in LA can attest to the fact that the local media won't shut up about moore's "documentary". It reminds me how many people (how few) aren't thinking for themselves.
What happens if the KKK produces a "documentary"? Classification would matter a great deal. Extreme example, I admit.
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on June 26, 2004, 01:11:00 PM
| QUOTE (The unProfessional @ Jun 26 2004, 03:25 PM) |
| Basically I can't help but let it affect my temper a little bit. I'm laid back about most issues. But, I know how much stock people put into movies. People often see the word documentary and assume it's true. Fact is, it's supposed to be true... or at least make an attempt at truth. So if a propagandist, right or left, releases heavily opinionated material, marks it as Information, and people take it as gospel, there is a problem. The films classification doesn't matter do you, raptor, because you're thinking for yourself. You understand what Fahrenheit is about, and you're aware of it's purpose. Anyone in LA can attest to the fact that the local media won't shut up about moore's "documentary". It reminds me how many people (how few) aren't thinking for themselves. What happens if the KKK produces a "documentary"? Classification would matter a great deal. Extreme example, I admit. |
i see the point your making, that many americans wont be able to judge fact from fiction, and they'll go see this movie thinking its all 100% true (which, it techinically is, but its a very warped truth)
alot of the time, this would bother me to, but the two issues Moore has picked to create this warped truth (Columbine = guns, and 9/11 + bush) i want him to make the movie very extreme against those issues, as i dont care for guns (not saying im some sort of hippy, just dont see why there needed) and i certainly dont care for Bush, who cant even talk clearly.
but like i said, i know what your getting at, and if it were any other movie, i would be very angry or upset if people kept calling it a documentary and taking it as truth.
Post by: melon on June 26, 2004, 01:50:00 PM
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on June 27, 2004, 08:27:00 AM
Post by: HeLiuM on June 27, 2004, 09:34:00 AM
The main attacks on the documentary were far more spun than it was (Moore thinks 9/11 happened because there weren't enough black people on the planes? Yes, I realize it was just a humorous attack, with no substance whatsoever. Never was it implied.) He never attacked the soldiers before defending them, he simply showed what THEY had to say. They said it was pretty much shoot anything that moved in the early war, well I wonder where that came from. Orders, or lack thereof. A fault of the administration, not the soldiers.
Before you burn it, at least see it, so you'll have a shred of knowledge about what it is you're trying to bury.
Post by: melon on June 27, 2004, 11:23:00 AM
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on June 27, 2004, 04:00:00 PM
| QUOTE (ahhh @ Jun 27 2004, 06:46 PM) |
| I think a few of them won't see it because they think that if they do then there money is supporting terrorism or something... |
haha, that made me chuckle
Post by: The unProfessional on June 27, 2004, 04:31:00 PM
I only wish they were different more often
Post by: Master-Chief on June 28, 2004, 05:31:00 AM
Nobody flame me, but the ending was HILARIOUS!!
Post by: TSOPrano on June 28, 2004, 09:28:00 AM
| QUOTE (The unProfessional @ Jun 26 2004, 09:25 PM) |
| Basically I can't help but let it affect my temper a little bit. I'm laid back about most issues. But, I know how much stock people put into movies. People often see the word documentary and assume it's true. Fact is, it's supposed to be true... or at least make an attempt at truth. So if a propagandist, right or left, releases heavily opinionated material, marks it as Information, and people take it as gospel, there is a problem. The films classification doesn't matter do you, raptor, because you're thinking for yourself. You understand what Fahrenheit is about, and you're aware of it's purpose. Anyone in LA can attest to the fact that the local media won't shut up about moore's "documentary". It reminds me how many people (how few) aren't thinking for themselves. What happens if the KKK produces a "documentary"? Classification would matter a great deal. Extreme example, I admit. |
What the hell are you talking about? Everything that was in the film was based on fact.
Are you telling me the connections between the bin Laden's and Bush's is not fact? Are you telling me that the Taliban did not come to Texas to talk about the pipeline? Are you telling me people, such as the Saudis, did not benefit from 9/11? Are you telling me that major corporations and the American government (who is major corporations) are not going to benefit from Iraq?
Give me a break buddy. If a film was made by the KKK what facts can they base it off of? All they are about is hating black people. I don't see fact in that.
As much as Moore's documentary is biased, it is true. Anyone, right or left, can see this.
Tell me, if someone made a documentary about Hitler, how can they make it unbiased? You say "The holocaust was a terrible thing, many people were murdered" then on the other side of the spectrum, to make it unbiased, do you really say "Yeah, but the good things Hitler did were..."?
No, of course not.
Post by: gcskate27 on June 28, 2004, 09:53:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| Tell me, if someone made a documentary about Hitler, how can they make it unbiased? You say "The holocaust was a terrible thing, many people were murdered" then on the other side of the spectrum, to make it unbiased, do you really say "Yeah, but the good things Hitler did were..."? |
thats a really good analogy, but some dumbass is going to say you are comparing bush to hitler and base thier legless argument around that...
Post by: gcskate27 on June 28, 2004, 10:10:00 AM
"theres and old saying tennesse, well its an old saying in texas, im sure its in tennesse... 'fool me once, shame on... shame on... you? fool me twice...... well you cant get fooled two times...'"
Post by: Banj on June 28, 2004, 10:49:00 PM
I thought the piece on the woman who lost her son in Kabahla was bollocks, it seemed Michael Moore was going for the sympathy vote with that but let's be real about it. She's from a family that has a LOT of members in the military but seems so swing completely against when her son was killed in Iraq.......what the fuck did she expect? She said that her son was out there for 'nothing', fuck me woman, your son is in the army, don't you know he's invading a poverty stricken country and shooting poor people? A just cause to all idiot American fucks.
I personally think the army and everyone in it is shit, and was quite satisfied with it's/thier portrayal in Fahrenheit 9-11, a bunch of dip-shits with guns.
Post by: Foe-hammer on June 29, 2004, 12:31:00 AM
| QUOTE (Banj @ Jun 29 2004, 07:49 AM) |
| I personally think the army and everyone in it is shit, and was quite satisfied with it's/thier portrayal in Fahrenheit 9-11, a bunch of dip-shits with guns. |
Grow up, you cheese eating surrender monkey.
Post by: therebelious1 on June 29, 2004, 01:49:00 AM
Post by: moistness on June 29, 2004, 03:59:00 AM
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on June 29, 2004, 04:07:00 AM
| QUOTE (Foe-hammer @ Jun 29 2004, 03:31 AM) |
| Grow up, you cheese eating surrender monkey. |
actually, banj's comment is righ on track with the army
Post by: moistness on June 29, 2004, 04:17:00 AM
| QUOTE (Foe-hammer @ Jun 29 2004, 10:31 AM) |
| Grow up, you cheese eating surrender monkey. |
Can we calm it down with the monkey insults please?
Post by: Ween311 on June 29, 2004, 05:30:00 AM
I went to Blockbuster to rent Bowling for Columbine and Roger & Me (Michael Moore's other documentaries). I got Roger & Me but they did not have Bowling for Columbine. I went to a record store at my mall to try to buy the DVD of it and I looked in the special interest section. Not there. Strange....that is where all of the other documentaries are. I went to the front counter to ask if they had it in stock and the girl looked it up on her computer and guess what section it ended up being in.........Comedy. Wierd.
Again, not trying to start any arguments as I think this film should have been in the documentary section too, but I just found it kind of funny.
Post by: Foe-hammer on June 29, 2004, 08:41:00 AM
| QUOTE (67thRaptorBull @ Jun 29 2004, 01:07 PM) |
| actually, banj's comment is righ on track with the army |
| QUOTE |
| I personally think the army and everyone in it is shit.... |
You obviously do not have any family or friends in the armed forces then, do you? I value the opinions of those men and women who have fought, and who are now fighting to keep this nation free a lot more then some child venting his frustrations on issues he does not fully understand. Give gratitude to those who have died for your freedom so you can bitch.
Post by: gcskate27 on June 29, 2004, 08:55:00 AM
Post by: Banj on June 30, 2004, 12:22:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| You obviously do not have any family or friends in the armed forces then, do you? I value the opinions of those men and women who have fought, and who are now fighting to keep this nation free a lot more then some child venting his frustrations on issues he does not fully understand. Give gratitude to those who have died for your freedom so you can bitch. |
......typical patriot, blindly accepting the things done in his name.
Foe-Hammer, don't be ignorant, question and challenge the things that are done on your behalf. You may as well be under a dictatorship with a subservient attitude. Alternatively you can continue to put your fingers in your ears and go "la la la, not listening" just because you have members on your family murdering the 'have nots'. The Coalision Forces are not interested in your freedom and they certainly haven't liberated Iraq from anything other than safety and thier own freedom. They are acting on an agenda and freedom is nothing to do with it.
And for the record, I do have friends and family in the forces, doesn't mean I HAVE to support what they are doing. It's called cognitive process, give it a try.
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on June 30, 2004, 05:10:00 AM
| QUOTE (Foe-hammer @ Jun 29 2004, 11:41 AM) |
| You obviously do not have any family or friends in the armed forces then, do you? I value the opinions of those men and women who have fought, and who are now fighting to keep this nation free a lot more then some child venting his frustrations on issues he does not fully understand. Give gratitude to those who have died for your freedom so you can bitch. |
i think the key word there was "who have fought"
as the last time i checked, the only real war that was to protect the american way was WWII, so.......why should i support the military when they havnt done anything greatful for america in how many years????
Post by: Ween311 on June 30, 2004, 05:31:00 AM
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on June 30, 2004, 05:45:00 AM
| QUOTE (Ween311 @ Jun 30 2004, 08:31 AM) |
| How did this thread go from thoughts on Michael Moore's new film to whether the military is good or not. I think that should be a topic for another thread. |
agreed
Post by: Master-Chief on June 30, 2004, 06:29:00 AM
| QUOTE (gcskate27 @ Jun 28 2004, 03:10 PM) |
| ^ actually... "theres and old saying tennesse, well its an old saying in texas, im sure its in tennesse... 'fool me once, shame on... shame on... you? fool me twice...... well you cant get fooled two times...'" |
Yup, that's it!
And the North, South, West, and East one was also cracking me up!
Post by: FrontLineAssembly on June 30, 2004, 08:18:00 AM
"Every nazi plane has a cross." - The Robot ate me.
Post by: Foe-hammer on June 30, 2004, 09:08:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| The Coalision Forces are not interested in your freedom and they certainly haven't liberated Iraq from anything other than safety and their own freedom. They are acting on an agenda and freedom is nothing to do with it. |
Get a clue. Some of you guys are so numbed into thinking of alternative motives, that you will make up shit or believe whatever comes your way that agrees with your idealology. They removed the greatest weapon of mass destruction already: Sadam. But by your view i'm sure you think he is a peace loving guy who was the perfect leader for iraq. And that he should have remained dictator. It is you who needs to pull your fingers out of your ears and wake up.
| QUOTE |
| why should i support the military when they havent done anything greatful for america in how many years???? |
Ya your right, they haven't done anything for you except keep your ass free so you can go on bitching relentlessly. You honestly think if the US didn't have a powerful standing army that it would last? Their presence and behind the scene activities is what keeps you all safe and carefree, free to complain to your hearts content. Too many ungrateful people.
Post by: gcskate27 on June 30, 2004, 10:19:00 AM
| QUOTE (Foe-hammer @ Jun 30 2004, 01:08 PM) |
| They removed the greatest weapon of mass destruction already: Sadam. But by your view i'm sure you think he is a peace loving guy who was the perfect leader for iraq. And that he should have remained dictator. |
so the US should just get rid of every countrys leader that they dont agree with? hell, why not? lets police the world and set up territories everywhere... then itd be like we owned the world! thatd be awesome!
Post by: therebelious1 on June 30, 2004, 10:22:00 AM
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on June 30, 2004, 10:51:00 AM
| QUOTE (Foe-hammer @ Jun 30 2004, 12:08 PM) |
| Get a clue. Some of you guys are so numbed into thinking of alternative motives, that you will make up shit or believe whatever comes your way that agrees with your idealology. They removed the greatest weapon of mass destruction already: Sadam. But by your view i'm sure you think he is a peace loving guy who was the perfect leader for iraq. And that he should have remained dictator. It is you who needs to pull your fingers out of your ears and wake up. Ya your right, they haven't done anything for you except keep your ass free so you can go on bitching relentlessly. You honestly think if the US didn't have a powerful standing army that it would last? Their presence and behind the scene activities is what keeps you all safe and carefree, free to complain to your hearts content. Too many ungrateful people. |
you....are.....an....idiot
the only reason the US would be gone NOWADAYS if we didnt have an army, is if we were attacked....by our selves??
what i mean is, the US is the only country in the world right now taking over any country it feels like. aka, the US is being a little bitch
so, like i said, wed be fine without the piece of shit army we have now, unless we attacked ourselves the way were attacking other countries. so i guess the solution is the US should bend over and take it up the ass......
Post by: Foe-hammer on June 30, 2004, 10:57:00 PM
| QUOTE (67thRaptorBull @ Jun 30 2004, 07:51 PM) |
| you....are.....an....idiot the only reason the US would be gone NOWADAYS if we didnt have an army, is if we were attacked....by our selves?? what i mean is, the US is the only country in the world right now taking over any country it feels like. aka, the US is being a little bitch so, like i said, wed be fine without the piece of shit army we have now, unless we attacked ourselves the way were attacking other countries. so i guess the solution is the US should bend over and take it up the ass...... |
You are a child. You think like a child, and act like a child.
So if the US had no army, and some other army came and invaded, who the hell would stop them? You? You would be the one bending over and taking it.
Post by: gronne on July 01, 2004, 01:50:00 AM
| QUOTE |
You are a child. You think like a child, and act like a child. So if the US had no army, and some other army came and invaded, who the hell would stop them? You? You would be the one bending over and taking it. |
When was the last time a country declared war on USA? To be honest I don't know, perhaps WW2. And since WW2 you've fought in Korea, Vietnam, the Gulf war and the last one. None of those declared war on USA. So, I wonder, is your army really the reason you still have your freedom? In the end it will be the reason you won't have your freedom anymore. Your army is the reason WE don't feel any more freedom.
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on July 01, 2004, 07:29:00 AM
| QUOTE (Foe-hammer @ Jul 1 2004, 01:57 AM) |
| and some other army came and invaded, who the hell would stop them? |
thats what im saying retard, how long has it been since a country declared war, or invaded the US......the War of 1812 (ie, british invaded the US), because in WWII we declared war on Japan first, then they declared back
so, what has our army been fighting off for us the last 60 years?? o thats right, nothing.
the only country a threat to the US or any other country in the world is the US
Post by: jp110099 on July 01, 2004, 07:32:00 AM
| QUOTE (mirx999 @ Jun 18 2004, 03:27 PM) |
| While the guy pisses me off like crazy (he's a green, by the way), He's a master of research. |
Actually, he's admitted to being a Socialist, he is extrmely far left wing.
Post by: jp110099 on July 01, 2004, 07:59:00 AM
| QUOTE (67thRaptorBull @ Jun 30 2004, 08:10 AM) |
| i think the key word there was "who have fought" as the last time i checked, the only real war that was to protect the american way was WWII, so.......why should i support the military when they havnt done anything greatful for america in how many years???? |
That is the stupidest thing I have ever heard, by the way. The Army is here to protect us, IN CASE someone does do something to us. They aren't here to put on a show to impress 67thRaptorBull.
And I know I am going to get flamed for this but, I am not a Bush fan by any stretch of the imagination, but I think he has a wonderful foreign policy. If you knew why we are in Iraq now, I don't think you'd hate Bush so much.
BTW, this post was directed to 67thRaptorBull.
Post by: gcskate27 on July 01, 2004, 08:53:00 AM
| QUOTE (jp110099 @ Jul 1 2004, 11:59 AM) |
| If you knew why we are in Iraq now, I don't think you'd hate Bush so much. |
ok, why are we in iraq... its changed so many times im not that sure anymore... first it was the wmd's, then it was al-qaeda links, then it was just that saddam was a bad guy...
so which is it?
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on July 01, 2004, 09:19:00 AM
| QUOTE (jp110099 @ Jul 1 2004, 10:59 AM) |
| That is the stupidest thing I have ever heard, by the way. The Army is here to protect us, IN CASE someone does do something to us. |
yes, i know what an army does, but
1) are army isnt protecting us from shit right now, its actually stirring up a huge shit storm, so how is inciting attacks protecting us?
2) i never said we didnt need a military, i just said we didnt need this POS military in which we shoto anything that moves and invade countries for no reason because we got are asses whooped by some terrorists one day
Post by: jp110099 on July 01, 2004, 09:43:00 AM
| QUOTE (gcskate27 @ Jul 1 2004, 11:53 AM) |
| ok, why are we in iraq... its changed so many times im not that sure anymore... first it was the wmd's, then it was al-qaeda links, then it was just that saddam was a bad guy... so which is it? |
Well, when Bush Senior made it mandatory that we could come in and look for whatever we wanted. But for 12yrs we went in and Saddam said we could look wherever except here, or there. You could go there, but not here, etc. He wasn't letting us look wherever we wanted even tho we were allowed to. Plus we all know he's a nut case, he gases his own people. So Bush Jr. finally said we're coming in. At first to find the WMDs and now we want to turn them into a democracy, and a long turn result would be more countries in that area realizing how well a democracy is and hopefully they will change. But we wouldn't be over there at all if it wasn't for oil. Our country and for the most part, our way of life, depends on oil.
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on July 01, 2004, 09:51:00 AM
| QUOTE (jp110099 @ Jul 1 2004, 12:43 PM) |
| Well, when Bush Senior made it mandatory that we could come in and look for whatever we wanted. But for 12yrs we went in and Saddam said we could look wherever except here, or there. You could go there, but not here, etc. He wasn't letting us look wherever we wanted even tho we were allowed to. Plus we all know he's a nut case, he gases his own people. So Bush Jr. finally said we're coming in. At first to find the WMDs and now we want to turn them into a democracy, and a long turn result would be more countries in that area realizing how well a democracy is and hopefully they will change. But we wouldn't be over there at all if it wasn't for oil. Our country and for the most part, our way of life, depends on oil. |
no, the long term result is more countries getting pissed off by us
a democracy in the middle east is like a bag of coke in a rehab clinic, its gonna cuase a shit storm
Post by: bluedeath on July 01, 2004, 09:55:00 AM
| QUOTE (67thRaptorBull @ Jul 1 2004, 06:51 PM) |
| no, the long term result is more countries getting pissed off by us a democracy in the middle east is like a bag of coke in a rehab clinic, its gonna cuase a shit storm |
Brilliant analogy. I really do love watching the handicapped try to communicate. Good job. Have a cookie.
Post by: gcskate27 on July 01, 2004, 09:57:00 AM
you were lied to, twice...
just beacuse hes a bad guy isnt enough of a reason for us to invade them and set up a US friendly gov... if it was, why arent we doing this to countries with no oil?
its not the US's job to police the world... and dont kid yourself that middle eastern countries are going to see what we did to iraq and suddenly decide democracy is the way to go... thats just naive...
Post by: jp110099 on July 01, 2004, 10:19:00 AM
| QUOTE (gcskate27 @ Jul 1 2004, 12:57 PM) |
| its not the US's job to police the world... and dont kid yourself that middle eastern countries are going to see what we did to iraq and suddenly decide democracy is the way to go... thats just naive... |
not tomorrow, not in a year, but over a long period of time.
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on July 01, 2004, 01:16:00 PM
| QUOTE (jp110099 @ Jul 1 2004, 01:19 PM) |
| not tomorrow, not in a year, but over a long period of time. |
no, it wont happen
those countries have been there for at least 1,000's of years
why all the sudden are they going to change their whole principles and way of life, because some dumbshit, POS country (the us and bush) decide to invade any country with oil and set up a democracy, when the US hasnt even been around for 300 years??
because we have power.......no, if we attack another country like we did iraq, the US is done for by the world community
i hate ignorant american fucks that think 9/11 makes it so we can do whatever we want now
its pretty sad we got our asses kicked by 19 men and 3 planes
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on July 01, 2004, 06:07:00 PM
i just saw the movie, and biased or not, its a hell of a moving movie
like someone said, theres also funny parts, such as a senator commenting on the patriot act, and saying how if anyone has questions to call his 800 number, but at the bottom moore says he doesnt have an 800 number so he put in the guys real office number
the part with the mother who lost her son and some bitch came up to her and said iraq was the right choice was touching, cuase this mom was all emotional as her son died in iraq and some bitch is trying to tell her shes wrong
all in all, good movie that really shows how big of a dumbass bush is
Post by: jp110099 on July 01, 2004, 06:10:00 PM
| QUOTE (67thRaptorBull @ Jul 1 2004, 04:16 PM) |
| no, it wont happen those countries have been there for at least 1,000's of years why all the sudden are they going to change their whole principles and way of life, because some dumbshit, POS country (the us and bush) decide to invade any country with oil and set up a democracy, when the US hasnt even been around for 300 years?? because we have power.......no, if we attack another country like we did iraq, the US is done for by the world community i hate ignorant american fucks that think 9/11 makes it so we can do whatever we want now its pretty sad we got our asses kicked by 19 men and 3 planes |
it was 4 planes and if you hate this country, leave, please. We don't need/want you here.
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on July 01, 2004, 06:20:00 PM
| QUOTE (jp110099 @ Jul 1 2004, 09:10 PM) |
| it was 4 planes and if you hate this country, leave, please. We don't need/want you here. |
well, you ovbiously werent paying attention
were the hell is this fourth plane from.....i remember one hit the pentagon, 2 hit the world trade centers and 1 hit a corn field
now if you count putting a whole in a cornfield, then i guess 4 planes and 19 men kicked this countries ass
if not, then it was 3 planes......
and i dont hate the US, just the ignorant fucks in it (ie, the bush administration and anyone who likes to take it in the butt from them) that think 9/11 gives us the right to do whatever we want and fuck whatever country we want
well it doesnt, and honestly i think alot of the connections in Fahrenheit 9/11 are part of the reason for iraq, i also think the BIG MACHO BUSH ADMINISTRATION couldnt handle getting the shit kicked out of them by 3 planes and 19 men, and they werent satsified with a POS country like afghanistan to play war in, so they moved to iraq, but i still dont think all the oil and dead marines in iraq fulfilled the administration either
basically, bush thinks he tough, texas cowboy shit, when he cant even tie his own sholaces
Post by: jp110099 on July 01, 2004, 06:40:00 PM
| QUOTE (67thRaptorBull @ Jul 1 2004, 09:20 PM) |
| well, you ovbiously werent paying attention were the hell is this fourth plane from.....i remember one hit the pentagon, 2 hit the world trade centers and 1 hit a corn field now if you count putting a whole in a cornfield, then i guess 4 planes and 19 men kicked this countries ass if not, then it was 3 planes...... and i dont hate the US, just the ignorant fucks in it (ie, the bush administration and anyone who likes to take it in the butt from them) that think 9/11 gives us the right to do whatever we want and fuck whatever country we want well it doesnt, and honestly i think alot of the connections in Fahrenheit 9/11 are part of the reason for iraq, i also think the BIG MACHO BUSH ADMINISTRATION couldnt handle getting the shit kicked out of them by 3 planes and 19 men, and they werent satsified with a POS country like afghanistan to play war in, so they moved to iraq, but i still dont think all the oil and dead marines in iraq fulfilled the administration either basically, bush thinks he tough, texas cowboy shit, when he cant even tie his own sholaces |
Why are you criticizing of GWB? You can barely type, and at least he was smart enought to graduate from Yale and get an MBA from Harvard. And I believe it was 4 planes. I happen to like corn, and the "whole" was in a field in Pennsylvania, not near corn. Plus it took American lives which is considered an attack on this country. At least their were a few loyal Americans who prevented another attack on an important landmark. And since you're so smart, and seem to know how bad Bush is, name something good a President has done? What you can't w/o google or another search engine? Oh thats right because when the Presidents make smart descisions they get no publicity, cause thats their job, but the instance they, god forbid, make a mistake the media and people are down their throats. Would see Moore's next movie if it was "George Bush Does Everything Right!!"? I didn't think so. And please, since you seem to be perfect and would make all the right decisions as President, please run for office.
BTW, I am not defending Bush, I just feel 67thRaptorBull is the biggest idiot in the US.
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on July 01, 2004, 07:04:00 PM
| QUOTE (jp110099 @ Jul 1 2004, 09:40 PM) |
| Why are you criticizing of GWB? You can barely type, and at least he was smart enought to graduate from Yale and get an MBA from Harvard. And I believe it was 4 planes. I happen to like corn, and the "whole" was in a field in Pennsylvania, not near corn. Plus it took American lives which is considered an attack on this country. At least their were a few loyal Americans who prevented another attack on an important landmark. And since you're so smart, and seem to know how bad Bush is, name something good a President has done? What you can't w/o google or another search engine? Oh thats right because when the Presidents make smart descisions they get no publicity, cause thats their job, but the instance they, god forbid, make a mistake the media and people are down their throats. Would see Moore's next movie if it was "George Bush Does Everything Right!!"? I didn't think so. And please, since you seem to be perfect and would make all the right decisions as President, please run for office. BTW, I am not defending Bush, I just feel 67thRaptorBull is the biggest idiot in the US. |
you name one good thing bush has done, just one
all i see is 5 trillion in debt since he was in office (thats 7.5 trillion under the funds reserved for social security) an unneccesarry attack on iraq with the result of innocent lives lost (15,000 iraqis and 750 or something around there americans)
what else, oo, unemployment is going up, buisness' going out of country, shit what hasnt he dont wrong
so name one good thing he did right
and yes, it was 4 planes, but only 3 that totally kicked the shit out of us
your right though, all presidents do fuck up, but not a negative 5 trillion deficit right after clinton was actually improving the deficit
jesus, bush cant even say "we were aware" right, he adds on "s" to the god damn word
and yes, there were brave americans on flight 93 (im pretty sure thats what it was) but now america is full of racsist (to anyone wearing anything resembling a towel on thier head) ignorant, "im so happy for this country, everyone favor us because we were attacked" mindless fucks that dont give a shit what the president does because they wont open there eyes and see nothing is wrong in the world, nothing needs to be done about certain countries to ensure security (ie, iraq) and that the only threat in this world is the US
please correct my spelling as its late for me
Post by: havocaose on July 01, 2004, 08:18:00 PM
| QUOTE (67thRaptorBull @ Jul 1 2004, 10:29 AM) |
| thats what im saying retard, how long has it been since a country declared war, or invaded the US......the War of 1812 (ie, british invaded the US), because in WWII we declared war on Japan first, then they declared back so, what has our army been fighting off for us the last 60 years?? o thats right, nothing. the only country a threat to the US or any other country in the world is the US |
judging by present day events... we wouldn't last a year without an army, maybe we aren't being attacked by all the countries who want us all to die BECUASE we have an army.
Post by: Foe-hammer on July 01, 2004, 08:38:00 PM
| QUOTE (67thRaptorBull @ Jul 2 2004, 04:04 AM) |
| please correct my spelling as its late for me |
Spelling is the least of things that you need to worry about correcting. Fist try working on your pessimistic piss poor ungrateful bitching attitude.
Post by: gcskate27 on July 01, 2004, 08:43:00 PM
Post by: Foe-hammer on July 01, 2004, 08:56:00 PM
Post by: therebelious1 on July 01, 2004, 11:09:00 PM
Post by: miazmaticdotcom on July 02, 2004, 02:28:00 AM
Seriously, I don't get how anyone can be conservative. The more skin we can show on late night TV, the better.
Post by: jp110099 on July 02, 2004, 08:15:00 AM
| QUOTE (67thRaptorBull @ Jul 1 2004, 10:04 PM) |
| you name one good thing bush has done, just one all i see is 5 trillion in debt since he was in office (thats 7.5 trillion under the funds reserved for social security) an unneccesarry attack on iraq with the result of innocent lives lost (15,000 iraqis and 750 or something around there americans) what else, oo, unemployment is going up, buisness' going out of country, shit what hasnt he dont wrong so name one good thing he did right and yes, it was 4 planes, but only 3 that totally kicked the shit out of us your right though, all presidents do fuck up, but not a negative 5 trillion deficit right after clinton was actually improving the deficit jesus, bush cant even say "we were aware" right, he adds on "s" to the god damn word and yes, there were brave americans on flight 93 (im pretty sure thats what it was) but now america is full of racsist (to anyone wearing anything resembling a towel on thier head) ignorant, "im so happy for this country, everyone favor us because we were attacked" mindless fucks that dont give a shit what the president does because they wont open there eyes and see nothing is wrong in the world, nothing needs to be done about certain countries to ensure security (ie, iraq) and that the only threat in this world is the US please correct my spelling as its late for me |
Again, I am not supporting Bush, but I am defending him from you, since you know absolutely nothing. And I'm done arguing with someone who doesn't know the difference between "whole" and "hole".
Oh and BTW, the one good thing Bush has done was going into Iraq. Now its your turn. Afterall, I did ask you first.
Also, in the trailer for the movie he complains about Bush having Bin Laden's family members safely leave the country. Whats so bad about that? If my brother did a horrible domestic terrorist attack on the U.S., I'd want to be safely escorted away for far that people would take out their anger towards my brother on me.
Post by: gcskate27 on July 02, 2004, 08:52:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| the one good thing Bush has done was going into Iraq. |
and how was this a good thing? do you not mind being dupped by your gov not once, but twice and then given a bullshit excuse?
"uhh yeah i know we were wrong about these things but, uhh, he was a bad guy anyway right?"
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on July 02, 2004, 10:35:00 AM
| QUOTE (jp110099 @ Jul 2 2004, 11:15 AM) |
| Also, in the trailer for the movie he complains about Bush having Bin Laden's family members safely leave the country. Whats so bad about that? If my brother did a horrible domestic terrorist attack on the U.S., I'd want to be safely escorted away for far that people would take out their anger towards my brother on me. |
when a family member murders someone in a regular crime, they dont escort the family out of the country before getting a statement from them......or at least questioning them
Post by: jp110099 on July 02, 2004, 05:26:00 PM
| QUOTE (67thRaptorBull @ Jul 2 2004, 01:35 PM) |
| when a family member murders someone in a regular crime, they dont escort the family out of the country before getting a statement from them......or at least questioning them |
ok, but it all happened very fast. Everyone did the right thing on Sept. 11. We did what we could in the short amount of time that it happened, I'm sure they were concerned with American lives and safety. Look, stop complaining, unless you can prove you can do a better job.
And if Moore feels that Bush is doing a bad job, why is he still in this country. I think he is being a tad hypocritical.
Post by: BenJeremy on July 02, 2004, 06:35:00 PM
Does anybody here realize that Moore pulled a fast one over on you all?
Bush didn't ship off the Bin Ladens.
Anybody care to guess who the SOLE PERSON was that authorized it?
Anybody? It's a documented fact, and dollars to donuts Mr. Moore KNEW the answer, even as he pasted his falacious propoganda together....
Post by: jp110099 on July 02, 2004, 06:46:00 PM
| QUOTE (BenJeremy @ Jul 2 2004, 09:35 PM) |
| Sad. Does anybody here realize that Moore pulled a fast one over on you all? Bush didn't ship off the Bin Ladens. Anybody care to guess who the SOLE PERSON was that authorized it? Anybody? It's a documented fact, and dollars to donuts Mr. Moore KNEW the answer, even as he pasted his falacious propoganda together.... |
Aha! Finally someone educated. And no, I don't know. But I m gonna take an educated guess: Condolezza Rice? Oh well I give up.
Post by: Foe-hammer on July 02, 2004, 09:03:00 PM
| QUOTE (gcskate27 @ Jul 2 2004, 05:52 PM) |
| your not telling the WHOLE story there... they werent questioned in any way, they were just sent off... |
Wow! Talk about ignorance. It is you who is not telling the whole story, or just uninformed. The FBI interviewed them before they left the US and the investigators say no one on board the planes has turned out to be of interest. The independent 9/11 commission has reported that "each of the flights we have studied was investigated by the FBI and dealt with in a professional manner prior to its departure." Jeeze, some of you go to great extents to fabricate a story. Why are you doing this; lying to prove your point? Have you heard the term "kicking against the pricks"? If not looks it up, because it is exactly what a lot of you are doing.
Post by: Foe-hammer on July 02, 2004, 09:27:00 PM
| QUOTE (HeLiuM @ Jul 3 2004, 02:40 AM) |
| ... then invading Iraq for no damn reason at all. |
It truly is sad.
Try telling that to the people of Iraq, Saddam's people (men, women, and children), who he killed and/or brutally tortured and rapped (women). You really have no idea how terrible Saddam was, do you? Go ahead and ask one of them if you doubt.
Post by: gcskate27 on July 02, 2004, 09:33:00 PM
** so who was the sole person ben?
Post by: Foe-hammer on July 02, 2004, 09:54:00 PM
Anyway, the alleged connection between Bush and the Taliban that ruled Afghanistan, that Moore implied, was also utterly false. Story is, back in 1997 a delagation of top Taliban officals visited the US for extensive business dealings in Texas while Bush was gov. The dealings had to do with constructing a gas pipline through Afghanistan. The fact is that Bush never even meet with the Taliban reps. What More also doesn't say is that Clinton administration officals where the ones who met with the Taliban officals and that their visit was made with the Clinton administration's permission.
It's amazing what you learn when the WHOLE story is presented.
Post by: Ween311 on July 03, 2004, 05:25:00 AM
| QUOTE (gcskate27 @ Jul 3 2004, 06:33 AM) |
| i will admit that i was swayed by mr moores movie on this one, and i will take back what i said... i have since dled the 911 commisions briefs and will be reading them... i was previously missinformed... *notice not a single comment in retaliation to the evidence put forth... this is how all people should respond when they get shut down... ** so who was the sole person ben? |
The sole person that authorized the movement of the Bin Ladens was none other than...........
Richard Clark. Go figure.
Post by: BenJeremy on July 03, 2004, 06:43:00 AM
| QUOTE (Ween311 @ Jul 3 2004, 09:25 AM) |
| The sole person that authorized the movement of the Bin Ladens was none other than........... Richard Clark. Go figure. |
Exactly. The very person Moore idolizes and dotes over, it the one who actually committed the "heinous crime" Moore accuses the administration of.
Once you understand that, how can anybody continue to give this film any credibility? There are plenty more flaws with this film, many pointed out by liberal writers... who are just as upset with Moore idiotic game of playing loose and fast with the truth.
I point out this one item because it should raise the eyebrows of any educated, intelligent liberal who took the film at face value. The film is nothing but propoganda, from the same vehement crowd that gave you this:
As we can see, this is clearly a deranged bunch of people, hoping to sweep up an unsuspecting public with their paranoid, delusional, conspiracy-theory angles. When I see people who thought the film was "good" - I can only shake my head in sadness. People are easily duped, it seems.
Post by: BenJeremy on July 03, 2004, 06:57:00 AM
| QUOTE (Spency234 @ Jul 3 2004, 10:47 AM) |
| I'm not saying there weren't flaws with his movie. I'm not saying everything he said was true. But he interviewed a few very influencial people on the whole issue, where is your proof? Just throwing a name at us isn't going to do it. |
Richard Clark himself said so.
Clarke Claims Responsibility
Is "from the horse's own mouth" good enough for you?
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on July 03, 2004, 08:43:00 AM
HE has not made one right decision, iraq is turning into a shit storm, and for what? the deficit is at what, -5 trillion? in a matter of a couple of decades, social security funds will be depleted (which is gonna screw us over), and hes a bumbiling idiot.
Post by: Foe-hammer on July 03, 2004, 11:33:00 AM
| QUOTE (67thRaptorBull @ Jul 3 2004, 05:43 PM) |
| yes, moore does present the facts in a very misleading way, but the basics of it is that there facts, abit untrue at times, but i dont care if people have to make fake docuements to get the president out of power, he doesnt belong there. |
| QUOTE |
| yes, moore does present the facts in a very misleading way, but the basics of it is that there facts, abit untrue at times. |
There's logic for you.
| QUOTE |
| but i dont care if people have to make fake docuements to get the president out of power.... |
Sad.
Post by: Ween311 on July 03, 2004, 11:45:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| HE has not made one right decision, iraq is turning into a shit storm, and for what? the deficit is at what, -5 trillion? in a matter of a couple of decades, social security funds will be depleted (which is gonna screw us over), and hes a bumbiling idiot. |
I think that almost all of Congress voted to go to war. It was not GW's decision alone.
Social Security was screwed long before Bush stepped into office.
I am not saying that I support everything George Bush does (I have to put that in there so 67thRaptorBull doesn't accuse me of taking it in the behind from ol' GW) but I don't think that he is quite as bad as you make him out to be. Really.
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on July 03, 2004, 11:56:00 AM
| QUOTE (Ween311 @ Jul 3 2004, 02:45 PM) |
| I think that almost all of Congress voted to go to war. It was not GW's decision alone. Social Security was screwed long before Bush stepped into office. I am not saying that I support everything George Bush does (I have to put that in there so 67thRaptorBull doesn't accuse me of taking it in the behind from ol' GW) but I don't think that he is quite as bad as you make him out to be. Really. |
come one, negative 5 trillion in debt, when clinton was actually making money for the economy when he was in presidency
and foehammer, sometimes i dont know why you post
shit, give me a gun, ill shoot GWB myself
there ponder that for a while foehammer
Post by: Mr. Chips on July 03, 2004, 12:26:00 PM
What I can't stand is Michael Moore only tries to make Bush look dumb by showing embarrasing photos, or in makeup or golfing. Like if you are at golfcourse talking to reporters, WTF else would you do? It 's a golf course for cryin out loud.
Embarrasing photos are the job of Nation Enquirer. A serious Documentarist would work with facts, not interviews!! Sure, there are Interviews of people who have been "abducted" by Aliens, or have seen UFOs. Does that mean that is solid evidence? Well I guess if you consider that the Theory of Evolution still has a lot of momentum from being tax supported, if a person TELLS you something enough times it is true, again where is the evidence?
thanks
Post by: Ween311 on July 03, 2004, 04:43:00 PM
I think he thinks he was out of the loop because his counterterrorism plan was not implemented and he thinks that he could have prevented a lot of tragedy if his plan was adopted. Would it have? I don't know. But that is kind of beside the point. Moore is blaming Bush for things that he didn't do. Does that make Bush any better? No, but it should make people think twice about what other facts have been misrepresented by Michael Moore.
Oh yeah, I think most of the US Presidents have had pretty close ties to the Saudis. They do control most of the worlds oil.
Post by: HeLiuM on July 03, 2004, 07:06:00 PM
| QUOTE (Foe-hammer @ Jul 3 2004, 06:27 AM) |
| It truly is sad. Try telling that to the people of Iraq, Saddam's people (men, women, and children), who he killed and/or brutally tortured and rapped (women). You really have no idea how terrible Saddam was, do you? Go ahead and ask one of them if you doubt. |
Try telling that to dead coalition troops (and those who had to see others die). Try telling that to the Iraqis who lost families to "collateral damage". Try telling that to the otherwise innocent people who feel they have to rise against the invaders and form the resistance (You think abused prisoners gives the "terrorists" a recruiting boost? Guess what, the simple invasion and occupation of their country does too.)
Have you talked to any of these people? Have you even looked? You really have no idea how bad a choice this was do you?
While you're at it, tell that to the whoever falls victim to whatever results from the poor foreign relations caused by the war.
War is a last resort, not just an shortcut to getting your way.
Post by: Foe-hammer on July 03, 2004, 07:13:00 PM
| QUOTE (HeLiuM @ Jul 4 2004, 04:06 AM) |
| Have you talked to any of these people? |
Yes. You should too.
Post by: Foe-hammer on July 03, 2004, 07:46:00 PM
Post by: Mr. Chips on July 03, 2004, 08:50:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| You've talked to dead soldiers...? |
funny you should mention it, I just spoke to one last night thru my crystal ball
And you didn't aswer the question.
Let's keep this civil, guys !
Post by: Foe-hammer on July 03, 2004, 09:27:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| You've talked to dead soldiers and the families of iraqis killed by friendly fire? Care to elaborate a little as to how that conversation went (or are you just making things up)? |
I have talked to an Iraqi (names Muhammad) that came to the states. His family still lives in Iraq. He told me of some terrible stories about saddam, and recognized that possibly some of his innocent family members, "Allah forbid", might die due to friendly fire. But concluded that their sacrifice would not be in vain if saddam was taken from power. Question is have you talked to any Iraqis on this subject?
| QUOTE (HeLiuM @ Jul 4 2004, 05:41 AM) |
| So question for you, Foe-Hammer: what gives Bush the right to make these decisions against the international community? |
It was not just Bush's decision to use military force on saddam, the majority of his administration, vice pres, and Collin Powell felt that it was necessary. Bush gave the final word to do so. So if you want to criticize, criticize them all. Anyway, after the current terrorist situations of 9/11, and saddam not allowing the US to look in certain areas that were suspected of WMD, even after warnings that if they were not allowed in that it would be considered an act of threat, Bush and his admin decided to stop wasting time (thus giving saddam time to hide his WMD) and us military force. You ask what gives THEM the right to do this? How about saving lives from possible WMD, stopping saddams barbaric dictatorship, or known ties with Alqueda between saddam. And to say that we were lied to about WMD is incorrect. Do you honestly think that WMD would have been mentioned if they knowingly knew none existed, and thus making them liars without question? And just because no substantial evidence has surfaced doesn't mean it will not. And if Bush and his admin were such liars on the subject, why would they not just lie and say they found WMD? Common Helium, youre more intelligent then this.
Now I ask you again, how would have leaving saddam in power promote peace in Iraq?
Post by: Foe-hammer on July 04, 2004, 12:54:00 AM
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on July 04, 2004, 08:55:00 AM
| QUOTE (Foe-hammer @ Jul 4 2004, 03:54 AM) |
| Then i guess we agree that leaving saddam in power would not promote peace in Iraq. What we disagree on is how and in what manner he was relieved of power. Regardless, a regime collapse could not be avoided if saddam were to be relieved from power (he wasn't going to go quietly), and chaos is what's expected under such conditions. Whether Bush's approach was the right one only time will tell. I'm just glad that you or I did not have to make that decision. But instead of damning Pres. Bush for the decision he made, lets hope/pray that all will work out, and that Iraq will be a better place then what it was and now is. |
thats the thing foe-hammer, we can pray and hope, but it wont lead anywhere.
Theres all this talk that a democratic country in the middle east will help things for the better, but its just going to stir up a shit storm (think of how long those muslims have lived there, at least 10 centuries, there not going to enjoy a new form of government over there, which im sure the US will try to use as a poster boy)
and then think of all the iraqi's that are still fighting us, they wont just go away, and if things continue for much longer, its going to get much worse. You cant just take away a government that provided a safe haven from rapists, looters, power outages, food shortages, and (for a somewhat) dead civilians (yes, sadaam did kill civilians, but to the majority of the country, they didnt care as they were of different religion, ie kurds and shiots (sp??))
All im saying is, i wish the situation would get better, but the way bush seems to think, whatever happens in iraq (it gets worse, more soldiers die, it gets better bush plans more invasion) i doubt we will come out of it better off